Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pharo 9

pharo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 232 posts

Re: Pharo 9

#141

Post by radiowave »

Ardren wrote: post #116
Zenchess wrote: post #4

Just a heads up the pharolauncher does not seem to be working for me, at least for pharo 9. Manual download of vm + image 64bit works but 32 bit does not. I have been making pharo raylib bindings and plan to make a video soon about why Smalltalk is an interesting choice for game development, it's a very 'live-coding' feel, i.e. you run your game while the editor is still live, you have free reign to at any time modif…

Yeah, I'm having trouble with Pharolauncher too on Windows. Trying to launch any image (downloaded in launcher, or manually) results is an error. e.g. Retry? Error downloading 'https://files.pharo.org/get-files/90/pharo-vm-Windows-X86_64-stable.zip' Cancel Retry (The link is a 404, so that's something) Edit: "Templates: Pharo image (stable)" works (32bit v8)

It turns out to be the capital 'X' in X86 that is the problem. The same URL but with a lowercase 'x' works fine. Presumably someone in the Pharo team need to fix whatever image metadata the Pharo launcher is working from.

Re: Pharo 9

#142

Post by goatlover »

pjmlp wrote: post #84
a2800276 wrote: post #73

The page seems to be going out of it's way to not mention the word "Smalltalk". Does anyone have an idea why that is? Does Smalltalk have such a bad reputation nowadays or has someone trademarked the term?

I guess maybe because Pharo has moved beyond Smalltalk-80, and is its own thing nowadays, just like Raket is no longer just Scheme.

But the language itself is still Smalltalk with some extra classes, right?

Re: Pharo 9

#143

Post by goatlover »

varjag wrote: post #134
igouy wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cost of ST licences back when was beyond a joke March 7, 1988 "Smalltalk/V 286 is available now and costs $199.95" https://books.google.com/books?id=CD8EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA25&lpg=P... > nasty-looking non-native GUIs The "non-native GUI" was quite important because Smalltalk was running on MS-DOS — not on MS-Windows.

Well $200 in 1980s is something like $500 today. I don't think I own any piece of software costing that much.

Adobe products can cost that much on a yearly basis.

Re: Pharo 9

#144

Post by Santosh83 »

FpUser wrote: post #137
lghh wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you’re on mobile…

For people who are actively using their smartphones for many tasks. They're in majority I guess. I personally use smartphone as a phone, off-line GPS, camera (when I happen to not carry dedicated one) and to control various gismos like drones. I do not use it for reading, viewing websites, computing, etc.

What about music and videos/films?

I admit carrying a separate e-ink device is too much of a hassle, so I read books on the smartphone when am not at the PC.

Re: Pharo 9

#145

Post by goatlover »

StevePerkins wrote: post #124
pjmlp wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks Java :(

Smalltalk first appeared in 1972, and was a stable commercial product by 1980. Java didn't hit the market until over a decade and a half later. If you can't build adoption with a 15+ year head start, then it's not the next generation's fault. It just wasn't going to happen.

Java was able to ride the wave of the web's rise in popularity, particularly with their marketing of applets and the "network as the computer", with the idea of downloading Java code as needed to supplement the software you're using at the time. That and there was lots of talk about how the JVM was going to be the runtime of the future for all languages.

It's funny how Javascript and the web have turned out to be a more popular target. Nobody back in the late 90s/early 2000s would have thought that. JS was a toy and html was going away in favor of Flash or Java applets or .NET.

At any rate, timing is a really important part of gaining widespread adoption. Smalltalk was way ahead of its time in the 70s, but too early to really take advantage of networking, as their target was stand-alone personal computers.

Re: Pharo 9

#146

Post by cmrdporcupine »

StevePerkins wrote: post #124
pjmlp wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks Java :(

Smalltalk first appeared in 1972, and was a stable commercial product by 1980. Java didn't hit the market until over a decade and a half later. If you can't build adoption with a 15+ year head start, then it's not the next generation's fault. It just wasn't going to happen.

From 1980 to the late 80s or so people were struggling just to get Smalltalk to perform at reasonable speeds on microcomputer class hardware, so saying 1980 isn't really fair. And most of the research that went into getting Smalltalk (and Self) to perform well on those platforms was then used to get Java to perform.

In actuality, Smalltalk gave Java a headstart.

That said, Smalltalk just doesn't in general "play well with others"; its image based development environment, especially.

Re: Pharo 9

#147

Post by scroot »

publicola1990 wrote: post #136

Can it build GUIs? What about 2d/ 3d graphics? Does it interface with Java things? Databases?

> Can it build GUIs?

Yes. The GUI framework is called Spec (Spec2, to be specific) and supports multiple backends, including GTK.

Re: Pharo 9

#148

Post by cmrdporcupine »

igouy wrote: post #122
discreteevent wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java was free and open source and based on files rather than an image.

Java was free. (And marketed by a large organization.)

It's true, and a huge point. Until Squeak came along I as a hobbyist -- who was really interested in Smaltalk -- simply couldn't get my hands on a Smalltalk (other than GNU Smalltalk which doesn't count). All through the 80s and early 90s I salivated at screenshots and descriptions of it, but never got to play with it.

That said, When I did finally get Squeak, I found it pretty neat, but it just never blew me away like I thought it would. I just didn't have anything to do with it.

Re: Pharo 9

#149

Post by gavinray »

regularfry wrote: post #21
Zenchess wrote: post #4

Just a heads up the pharolauncher does not seem to be working for me, at least for pharo 9. Manual download of vm + image 64bit works but 32 bit does not. I have been making pharo raylib bindings and plan to make a video soon about why Smalltalk is an interesting choice for game development, it's a very 'live-coding' feel, i.e. you run your game while the editor is still live, you have free reign to at any time modif…

(incidentally: it's "free rein" as in horses, not "free reign" as in monarchs)

What, really?

Welp, I've had that wrong my entire life.

Re: Pharo 9

#150

Post by xkriva11 »

igouy wrote: post #139
xkriva11 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To really take advantage of its strengths, one needs to adopt to a completely new IDE and way of working, which puts a lot of people off. On the other hand, if it were adopted to behave like all other environments, there would be objections again, "It's exactly the same as what I'm using now. So why switch?" It should be added that Pharo addressed most of the small problems that the original Smalltalk had.

Most of the small problems but not the big problems ? :-)

:-)
Post reply on HN